Author Topic: No cascade = cbi abilities (Read 8649 times)

Gabe · « **Reply #25 on:** November 20, 2019, 09:00:51 AM »

Quote from: Bobbert on November 20, 2019, 08:52:38 AM

Reactivating is definitely abusable, though. How easy is it for me to band to someone powerful, woes my own banding card, and band again to get a powerful ability twice?

Not hard but you used your 3W, possibly in a less than optimal way unless the second use of that ability nets you a LS or a block.

The potential to activate a second time seems more like something that will make the opponent think twice before setting up that situation than a reason to use your own resources in less than ideal ways.

Bobbert · « **Reply #26 on:** November 20, 2019, 09:33:32 AM »

Perhaps, but I for one am more than happy to trade my Woes and Not Alone to turn a d7 into a d14 off Hannah.

AndyDevine1981 · « **Reply #27 on:** November 20, 2019, 09:35:07 AM »

The lingo sounds like your playing battleship instead of redemption.

Watchman · « **Reply #28 on:** November 20, 2019, 10:14:24 AM »

Quote from: Bobbert on November 20, 2019, 09:33:32 AM

Perhaps, but I for one am more than happy to trade my Woes and Not Alone to turn a d7 into a d14 off Hannah.

And then your opponent can use his woes and negate Hannah’s draw. Or your opponent’s hand is protected from her, in which case you get no draw. Or your opponent may not have 7 evil brigades in his hand. And even if he did your hand size is 16 max. There’re counters to every move, and there’s always a chance for an ability to be abused or OP (ie, Love on Devouring Phillies). But since the elders are trying to simplify abilities and the game for better gameplay for new and existing players, it’s much better to have the ability reactivate than to worry about potential abuse in a very specific situation that may or may not arise. And even if it did arise, as I stated in my other post, your opponent may not want to negate the band for strategic reasons.

kariusvega · « **Reply #29 on:** November 20, 2019, 12:57:06 PM »

So is cascade negate basically still happening if a “negate characters and enhancements” or fbtn card is played after the non cbi cbn abilities activated?

Kevinthedude · « **Reply #30 on:** November 20, 2019, 12:59:19 PM »

Quote from: kariusvega on November 20, 2019, 12:57:06 PM

So is cascade negate basically still happening if a “negate characters and enhancements” or fbtn card is played after the non cbi cbn abilities activated?

There doesn't have to be any cascade involved there. "Negate characters" targets all characters in play with a negate, no cascade necessary. Cascade negate refers to cards being negated without being directly targeted.

The Guardian · « **Reply #31 on:** November 20, 2019, 01:49:50 PM »

Quote from: Kevinthedude on November 20, 2019, 12:59:19 PM

Quote from: kariusvega on November 20, 2019, 12:57:06 PM
So is cascade negate basically still happening if a “negate characters and enhancements” or fbtn card is played after the non cbi cbn abilities activated?

There doesn't have to be any cascade involved there. "Negate characters" targets all characters in play with a negate, no cascade necessary. Cascade negate refers to cards being negated without being directly targeted.

^Correct (though keep in mind it's abilities being targeted by negate, not cards).

sepjazzwarrior · « **Reply #32 on:** November 20, 2019, 04:24:52 PM »

If you negate a negate that was negatings a negate thats negating a kill card, would the kill card reactivate?

Kevinthedude · « **Reply #33 on:** November 20, 2019, 05:06:16 PM »

Quote from: sepjazzwarrior on November 20, 2019, 04:24:52 PM

If you negate a negate that was negatings a negate thats negating a kill card, would the kill card reactivate?

Yes unless I counted the number of negates wrong. Straight forward negate wars like this aren't really affected by the removal of cascade.

Noah · « **Reply #34 on:** November 21, 2019, 01:03:31 AM »

I thought that the logic behind cascade negate regarding banding abilities was as follows.

You negate the band which means you undo the effects of the band and negate all abilities that activated as a result of the band.

If, without cascade negate, the banded character's ability activated, then it entered battle, even if the band was negated.

So, all negating the band should do, by my understanding, is remove the banded character from battle, but still register that character as having "entered battle" during the phase by game rule.

Otherwise, if the banded character never entered battle then its ability never activated, which I thought was the logic for cascade negate.

Where is the line drawn? Does negating a band mean that the banded character was in battle, but now it's not, or does it mean that the character never entered battle in the first place?

It is simple and codified that a unique character can't enter battle more than once per turn and generic and unique characters are designed with that limitation in mind.

So why does negating a band ability erase the fact that the character ever entered battle in the first place?

With the coming removal of cascade negate, is negating a band ability different than withdrawing a character? Why?

I think it's easier and slightly more intuitive to say that unique characters can't enter battle more than once in the same phase (including if they are banded and then the band is negated) than to say that they can be banded in more than once but their abilities don't activate subsequent times.

I really enjoy thinking through logical interactions like this and I haven't had the chance to think about this stuff in awhile. Thanks.

Kevinthedude · « **Reply #35 on:** November 21, 2019, 02:11:23 AM »

Quote from: Noah on November 21, 2019, 01:03:31 AM

I thought that the logic behind cascade negate regarding banding abilities was as follows.

You negate the band which means you undo the effects of the band and negate all abilities that activated as a result of the band.

If, without cascade negate, the banded character's ability activated, then it entered battle, even if the band was negated.

So, all negating the band should do, by my understanding, is remove the banded character from battle, but still register that character as having "entered battle" during the phase by game rule.

Otherwise, if the banded character never entered battle then its ability never activated, which I thought was the logic for cascade negate.

Where is the line drawn? Does negating a band mean that the banded character was in battle, but now it's not, or does it mean that the character never entered battle in the first place?

It is simple and codified that a unique character can't enter battle more than once per turn and generic and unique characters are designed with that limitation in mind.

So why does negating a band ability erase the fact that the character ever entered battle in the first place?

With the coming removal of cascade negate, is negating a band ability different than withdrawing a character? Why?

I think it's easier and slightly more intuitive to say that unique characters can't enter battle more than once in the same phase (including if they are banded and then the band is negated) than to say that they can be banded in more than once but their abilities don't activate subsequent times.

I really enjoy thinking through logical interactions like this and I haven't had the chance to think about this stuff in awhile. Thanks.

This is exactly what I've been saying for years. Saying that negate makes something never have happened is not how the game should try to work because it will always fail in certain scenarios. A negated band should still consider the character having entered battle that turn.

777Godspeed · « **Reply #36 on:** November 21, 2019, 10:34:49 AM »

Quote from: Noah on November 21, 2019, 01:03:31 AM

So, all negating the band should do, by my understanding, is remove the banded character from battle, but still register that character as having "entered battle" during the phase by game rule.

I think it's easier and slightly more intuitive to say that unique characters can't enter battle more than once in the same phase (including if they are banded and then the band is negated) than to say that they can be banded in more than once but their abilities don't activate subsequent times.

Quote from: Kevinthedude on November 21, 2019, 02:11:23 AM

A negated band should still consider the character having entered battle that turn.

This seems to sum up how I would play through a situation like this. It is straightforward, logical and uncomplicated. No more messy dishes.

Godspeed,
Mike

jesse · « **Reply #37 on:** November 21, 2019, 12:09:58 PM »

So by the concept of negate as undoing an ability instead of it never having happened, if a band of a unique character is negated, that negate is essentially CBI since a unique character cannot re-enter battle?

sepjazzwarrior · « **Reply #38 on:** November 21, 2019, 12:21:10 PM »

If you negate a negate, whatever that negate was negating would reactivate, so the unique character would come back into battle

jesse · « **Reply #39 on:** November 21, 2019, 12:33:15 PM »

But doesn't game rule not allow: "the unique character would come back into battle"?

I'm speaking hypothetically based off what a few people were saying as how they think that negate should not treat abilities as though they never happened

777Godspeed · « **Reply #40 on:** November 21, 2019, 12:36:50 PM »

Quote from: jesse on November 21, 2019, 12:09:58 PM

So by the concept of negate as undoing an ability instead of it never having happened, if a band of a unique character is negated, that negate is essentially CBI since a unique character cannot re-enter battle?

I think it has been put forward the character (generic or unique) can't re-enter battle more by game rule than CBI.

Quote from: sepjazzwarrior on November 21, 2019, 12:21:10 PM

If you negate a negate, whatever that negate was negating would reactivate, so the unique character would come back into battle

I see this as falling back under cascade negate, what we are currently trying to untangle.

Godspeed,
Mike

jesse · « **Reply #41 on:** November 21, 2019, 12:43:31 PM »

Well game rule allows for generic characters to enter battle more than once, but yes I agree that unique characters couldn't re-enter because of game rule, not CBI technically (but by this definition of negate, a negate of a unique character is "essentially" CBI since game rule wouldn't allow for the character to re-enter battle. The other definition of negate, though, would allow for the unique character to re-enter battle after the band was negated because it says the negate makes the band as if it had never happened).

Just wanting to understand the difference between these two proposed concepts of negate. The official rules version is that negate treats abilities as if they never happened, right?

777Godspeed · « **Reply #42 on:** November 21, 2019, 12:57:15 PM »

The one is what we currently do with cascade negate. A band is negated and cards are treated as if they never entered battle. What I understand we are looking to is: A band is negated, affected characters are kicked out of battle, but they are considered to have entered battle and their SA used.

Quote from: jesse on November 21, 2019, 12:43:31 PM

Well game rule allows for generic characters to enter battle more than once,

My question here would be... I have 1 Persian Horsemen in play in battle and a negate kicks him out, then I play, say Lurking... I can band Persian Horsemen back into battle?
We are then back into the "characters can re-enter battle, but remember their SA doesn't reactivate, or does it? scenario.
I am comfortable with them re-entering battle, without SA reactivation, as stated previously, SA used once during a phase discussion.

Godspeed,
Mike

sepjazzwarrior · « **Reply #43 on:** November 21, 2019, 01:19:22 PM »

Its not a cascade negate. When you negate a card under the ew rule, its ability is undone. If the ability of the card you negate was to negate a different card, you would undo that ability so the card you negated with the original negate would reactivate. So if you negate a negate, the card it was negating reactivates. So if you negate something that negates a band ability, the band ability would reactivate, making it like the character never left battle in the first place

777Godspeed · « **Reply #44 on:** November 21, 2019, 01:27:41 PM »

Quote from: sepjazzwarrior on November 21, 2019, 01:19:22 PM

making it like the character never left battle in the first place

That seems to be the crux of the argument. Are we viewing negate as making something as if it never happened?
or the band happened, was negated, the negate was negated, but the reality is that character HAD been brought into battle and can't be brought back into battle per game rule.

Godspeed,
Mike

sepjazzwarrior · « **Reply #45 on:** November 21, 2019, 01:46:03 PM »

If you negate a negate and the card it was negating originally doesnt reactivate, then the original negate is basically cbi, which is not whats intended by this rule change

777Godspeed · « **Reply #46 on:** November 21, 2019, 01:54:01 PM »

Quote from: sepjazzwarrior on November 21, 2019, 01:46:03 PM

If you negate a negate and the card it was negating originally doesnt reactivate,

I don't think this about it reactivating, but re-targeting a character previously brought into battle. This will be interesting to see how this shakes out in the end. I can see valid arguments for both sides.

Godspeed,
Mike

sepjazzwarrior · « **Reply #47 on:** November 21, 2019, 02:15:17 PM »

I guess it comes down to if you see the banding card that is no longer negated as activating like it did when it was first played or reactivating now that its no longer negated. I prefer the former since it is simpler to me rather than having to worry about unique/generic characters and if they can renter battle or not, and it also solves the problem of if there ability reactivates or not: it doesnt reactivate because the essencially never left battle

jesse · « **Reply #48 on:** November 21, 2019, 03:00:27 PM »

Negate entry from the R.E.G.

Spoiler (hover to show)

From the REG, it's not clear to me whether negate treats abilities as never having happened, or as just being undone.

Noah · « **Reply #49 on:** November 21, 2019, 03:51:05 PM »

When I said this,

Quote from: Noah on November 21, 2019, 01:03:31 AM

I think it's easier and slightly more intuitive to say that unique characters can't enter battle more than once in the same phase (including if they are banded and then the band is negated) than to say that they can be banded in more than once but their abilities don't activate subsequent times.

I meant that, without cascade negate, a unique character can't be banded into battle once, the band gets negated, and then be banded into battle a second time by ANOTHER band ability. That seems more intuitive than saying it can be banded in a second time, but the ability won't activate.

I didn't mean to confuse that with negating the negate that negated a band ability.

If I band to Paul and draw 2, the band is negated, and I later negate the negate that negated the band, absolutely no one has ever taken that to mean that I get to draw another 2 from Paul.

If the logic behind cascade negate was that subsequent cards are negated because "they never even happened", then in order to remove cascade negate you'd have to change this notion of what it means to negate something.

Thus, negating a band ability will undo the fact that there is a second character in the battle, but it can't undo the fact that the character entered battle because then the character's ability could never activate, blah blah blah, the logic of cascade negate.

I'm really excited for this change and I'm enjoying this conversation, but there's no way for me to state any of my points definitively until the actual wording of the rule change is released. I'm just trying to explain my understanding of the logical implications of a rule change that the elders have already discussed and codified in the new REG.

News:

Author Topic: No cascade = cbi abilities (Read 8649 times)

AndyDevine1981

kariusvega